In that thread, †both Clive, baby and Wee Billy Dembski point to C.S. Lewis' correspondence as evidence that Lewis was privately rejecting evolution in the 1950's while publicly embracing it.

In my 'net travels, I have observed that one sign of a crank is the belief that people (online, on TV,...) are communicating with said crank in code.

Creationists do this all the time, at UD and elsewhere. †"In their heart of hearts, scientists know goddidit, but won't admit it because of their career / fear of the International Scientist Conspiracy / Satan." †It's why they spend so much time looking for hidden pro-ID messages in the scientific literature.

A variant from usenet days: "People support me in email."

--------------"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

In that thread, †both Clive, baby and Wee Billy Dembski point to C.S. Lewis' correspondence as evidence that Lewis was privately rejecting evolution in the 1950's while publicly embracing it.

In my 'net travels, I have observed that one sign of a crank is the belief that people (online, on TV,...) are communicating with said crank in code.

Creationists do this all the time, at UD and elsewhere. †"In their heart of hearts, scientists know goddidit, but won't admit it because of their career / fear of the International Scientist Conspiracy / Satan." †It's why they spend so much time looking for hidden pro-ID messages in the scientific literature.

A variant from usenet days: "People support me in email."

Onlookers!

Khan attacked me in email. With a baseball bat.

Oh, how the heathen Darwinian materialists despise the innocent and pure of heart. I am just like Jesus, who was also persecuted.

I'm sure Clive would be very surprised to discover that I am actually Joseph. †Unfortunately I don't think his design detector is capable of anything more that "if it looks a bit like X then it must be X" so I guess my ubersocktard is safe for a while (unless he is watching? ... Clive?)

Just wait until he finds out that Louis is Denyse O'Leary.

I thought I was FTK. Look, if you're going to accuse me of being random internet people, get it straight will you?

Oh I don't know. I'm an optimistic cynic. After all I could be wrong. In fact it's quite likely I am.

Mind you, if I'm right then it really is advisable to start drinking heavily.......soon.

Louis

What more to say then but SKŇL!

BTW, Sweden has a rich tradition of debauchery (hope that is an appropriate term), and libertinism made immortal by a character named Bellmann; his songs about careless life with lavish amounts of wine, broads, strumming the zithar and maybe other joyful things of which my limited command of the English language makes me recognize only as images in my poor bourgeois soul... Guess this should be bumped to the BW.

In that thread, †both Clive, baby and Wee Billy Dembski point to C.S. Lewis' correspondence as evidence that Lewis was privately rejecting evolution in the 1950's while publicly embracing it.

In my 'net travels, I have observed that one sign of a crank is the belief that people (online, on TV,...) are communicating with said crank in code.

Creationists do this all the time, at UD and elsewhere. †"In their heart of hearts, scientists know goddidit, but won't admit it because of their career / fear of the International Scientist Conspiracy / Satan." †It's why they spend so much time looking for hidden pro-ID messages in the scientific literature.

A variant from usenet days: "People support me in email."

Onlookers!

Khan attacked me in email. With a baseball bat.

Oh, how the heathen Darwinian materialists despise the innocent and pure of heart. I am just like Jesus, who was also persecuted.

Someone from the BBC wants to interview me. I am not sure about that, because I am concerned that they are looking for a gap-tooth Canadian moron to spout Bible verses, rock the tent, and handle snakes.

Don't hesitate, Denyse. †You're perfect for the role.

--------------And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

To be fair KibyNp, this is part of a series of posts by OíLeary, the earlier ones providing the context. I think we can take a Darwinist to be a neo-Darwinist.

Right. †So people who follow the science developed by the likes of Fisher and Dobzhansky.

Quote

Why does it qualify as a religion? I think for the kind of reason that I have just pointed out. Neo-Darwinism incorporates metaphysical elements that are now doing much more than providing a framework for enquiry, but have been integrated into the belief systems of their adherents and are being used as personal frameworks for making sense of reality.

Dunno about you lot, but my personal framework for making sense of reality includes the theory of gravity.

I wonder, though, does anyone base their whole framework on Neo-Darwinist metaphysical elements? †And what are these metaphysical elements? †(Anyone? Anyone? Snowflake?)

Quote

The problem with this is that the personal belief system is contingent and vulnerable to refutation. These are not good characteristics to have in a personal belief system, and why I would recommend a classical one every time (i.e., the usual suspects, or failing that a very open agnosticism).

Ah, blind faith. †Someone doesn't want to be told they're wrong.

Quote

I am sure Denyse will provide a pithier and more accurate answer.

Pithier than GEM of Kon-tiki, certainly.

--------------It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

At the end of the day all inductive arguments must begin in belief, whether it is old or new riddles of induction, which is why the American strict division of science and faith in education policy is a fallacy.

Mario A Lopez, if you don't know, is IDs con-man. He's the guy who goes round setting up pages on networking sites, or just plain websites, to give the impression there is a groundswell of popular support for ID.

He's also a denier of common descent, which is always handy to know.

Quote

What this paper demonstrates is 1) the author presupposes ancestral relationships between humans and chimps

--------------...after reviewing the arguments, I‚Äôm inclined to believe that the critics of ENCODE‚Äôs bold claim were mostly right, and that the proportion of our genome which is functional is probably between 10 and 20%. --Vincent Torley, uncommondescent.com 1/1/2016

Hmm..I don't want to give that satirizingscientism any site hits, but given "Wascally Wabbit's" response to me, I think my †informed guess as to his identity was correct.

The funny part is that he'll be deleting my posts there for calling him a pendejo, which he claims is profanity. Except it's not, in Mexican slang/idiom (which is what I learned growing up in New Mexico). Literally, it means "pubic hair" and figuratively, it refers to an ass, an idiot. A fool. Given the "humor" of the site, you'd think he'd appreciate the term. Oh, well.